Turn on thread page Beta

How to deal with police that carry guns watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What point are you trying to make? That police shouldn't carry guns? As far as im aware they don't other than around certain establishments.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    The irony is if the police are armed then the criminals have no choice to bare arms at least as lethal. Violence only begets violence.
    That works both ways.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    That works both ways.
    So now the police are governed by the actions of criminals and terrorists? Sounds about right I suppose...
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    So now the police are governed by the actions of criminals and terrorists? Sounds about right I suppose...
    Well kind of. Those are the people their job it is to stop.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jcwh97)
    What point are you trying to make? That police shouldn't carry guns? As far as im aware they don't other than around certain establishments.
    They do in Scotland and we are 4 times more likely to be stopped and searched by police in Scotland. Still think we are better together?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Well kind of. Those are the people their job it is to stop.
    Then that puts the ball forever in criminals and terrorists court. One of the main aim or terrorism is to steal innitiative for if you control the behaviour of your enemy you can choose how they react.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    That's why police policy is to shoot to kill, not to wound or disable?
    There is a fundamental misunderstanding about "shoot to kill/wound to disable"

    It is very hard to guarantee a wound to disable, the best and safest option is to aim at the centre body mass in order to drop the target. Shooting guns out of people's hand is for Hollywood.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by domonict)
    There is a fundamental misunderstanding about "shoot to kill/wound to disable"

    It is very hard to guarantee a wound to disable, the best and safest option is to aim at the centre body mass in order to drop the target. Shooting guns out of people's hand is for Hollywood.
    They are still trained to shoot to kill even point blank range and even if wounding would be easier. I used to do gun training so I could shoot to wound.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sarahs.cheddars)
    When I was on holiday in America, I saw various police officers with guns and I felt safer than I ever did in the UK.
    I actually felt the opposite. The more people that are carrying deadly weapons around me, the less reassured I feel. When nobody around me is carrying a deadly weapon, the chances of somebody pulling a gun on me or anyone else is dramatically reduced...

    To be honest I dislike the police carrying guns here in the UK, although relatively few do, but at least in the UK I feel like they're disinclined to use them. Police shoot all the time in the US, with far less restraint.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    A breach of the peace is when two or more people complain to the police about an incident that has disturbed them.

    So, if you and a friend are disturbed by seeing police walking into sandwich shops etc toting weapons to kill people, then just report them. By law they have to be charged.

    If enough complaints are made then they'll have to reverse the decision to allow police to carry arms for everyday policing.
    Where did you get that idea from?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wade-)
    Where did you get that idea from?
    I got charged with breach of the peace and learnt how it worked
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    I got charged with breach of the peace and learnt how it worked
    Have you been to court yet?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    They are still trained to shoot to kill even point blank range and even if wounding would be easier. I used to do gun training so I could shoot to wound.
    Bull****

    At anything other than point blank, shooting someone only to wound is nigh on impossible. Especially when, in all likelihood, the person you're targeting is not stationary.

    UK police are not routinely armed. Your entire argument is, not unusually for one of your threads, balls.

    This 'gun training' you've done. Let me guess. Cadets for a year, maybe two, and the box set of Rambo? You might have played with the No.8 rifle or the L98 once or twice. Yes. That's definitely a comprehensive education in pistols, submachineguns and sniper-standard rifles against moving targets in ridiculously high pressure situations...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    I used to do gun training so I could shoot to wound.
    Call of Duty doesn't count mate.

    Jesus Christ your threads are nothing if not a bad joke.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by napkinsquirrel)
    Call of Duty doesn't count mate.

    Jesus Christ your threads are nothing if not a bad joke.
    No a RL gun club of course. Just like the police use. Got closed cause of Snowball campaign. You know Dunblane and all that jaz.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    No a RL gun club of course. Just like the police use. Got closed cause of Snowball campaign. You know Dunblane and all that jaz.
    Right so you're a member of a gun club, presumably training on a semi-auto rifle firing 9mm or 556 against man sized targets if what you're saying is correct? You're so full of sh*t; everyone can see.

    1. Pistols are illegal.
    2. Semi-auto rifles are illegal above .22 calibre
    3. Man sized and proportioned targets are illegal except on MoD ranges for military purpose.
    4. If the RCO of your range had the slightest feeling that you were training with a weapon for use against a human target, your FAC and club membership would be revoked pending police interview.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by napkinsquirrel)
    Right so you're a member of a gun club, presumably training on a semi-auto rifle firing 9mm or 556 against man sized targets if what you're saying is correct? You're so full of sh*t; everyone can see.

    1. Pistols are illegal.
    2. Semi-auto rifles are illegal above .22 calibre
    3. Man sized and proportioned targets are illegal except on MoD ranges for military purpose.
    4. If the RCO of your range had the slightest feeling that you were training with a weapon for use against a human target, your FAC and club membership would be revoked pending police interview.
    They may be illegal now but they were certainly licensed then and now as far as I know. Why wouldn't a gun club be licensed to use guns? That's the whole point of them no?

    Since this thread is being led down an increasingly technical path let me bring it back to the original post. Are you guys saying that because you don't believe I trained at a shooting range that therefor its cool for cops to tote guns for everyday situations. What if they visited a nursery? Or a mental ward in a hospital? Or the house of commons or lords? Or Buckingham palace? Or your living room while you're chilling in front of the TV?

    Is that really what it comes down to? And to whoever denied cops are routinely carrying guns they have been photgraphed where I live. Next you will question whether I am a photograph expert even though they were put on the front page of a national newspaper. If I cant prove I am a photograph expert to FBI standards you will conclude that therefor all cops should be armed in all circumstances.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    They may be illegal now but they were certainly licensed then and now as far as I know. Why wouldn't a gun club be licensed to use guns? That's the whole point of them no?

    Since this thread is being led down an increasingly technical path let me bring it back to the original post. Are you guys saying that because you don't believe I trained at a shooting range that therefor its cool for cops to tote guns for everyday situations. What if they visited a nursery? Or a mental ward in a hospital? Or the house of commons or lords? Or Buckingham palace? Or your living room while you're chilling in front of the TV?

    Is that really what it comes down to? And to whoever denied cops are routinely carrying guns they have been photgraphed where I live. Next you will question whether I am a photograph expert even though they were put on the front page of a newspaper. If I cant prove I am a photograph expert to FBI standards you will conclude that therefor all cops should be armed in all circumstances.
    You don't know what you're talking about.

    Handguns are banned in this country for all except the police and military. Rifle clubs exist but you can only use rifles there. Clay pigeon clubs exist but you can only use shotguns. All Handguns are banned. Even people like athletes who use target pistols have to leave the country to practise.

    I believe, though, that air pistols are different.

    No police in this country are routinely armed. This is a distinction you simply don't understand. Yes, some people are armed, but these are either at specific locations, are armed response or are anti terror.

    The Houses of Parliament always has armed police outside, so that argument is entirely bogus, which you'd know if you had an IQ measured in double digits.

    Buckingham palace also has armed guards outside all the time. They're called soldiers.


    This whole thing is about you allegedly feeling uncomfortable around guns, which makes the idea that you've had 'gun training' even more fanciful.


    There is no requirement for all police to be armed. Nobody is calling for it. Nobody wants it. And that includes the police.
    There are approximately 6000 armed police in the UK.
    There are approximately 130,000 police in the UK.

    The suggestion that all police are armed is, therefore, bolleaux.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    They may be illegal now but they were certainly licensed then and now as far as I know. Why wouldn't a gun club be licensed to use guns? That's the whole point of them no?

    Since this thread is being led down an increasingly technical path let me bring it back to the original post. Are you guys saying that because you don't believe I trained at a shooting range that therefor its cool for cops to tote guns for everyday situations. What if they visited a nursery? Or a mental ward in a hospital? Or the house of commons or lords? Or Buckingham palace? Or your living room while you're chilling in front of the TV?

    Is that really what it comes down to? And to whoever denied cops are routinely carrying guns they have been photgraphed where I live. Next you will question whether I am a photograph expert even though they were put on the front page of a national newspaper. If I cant prove I am a photograph expert to FBI standards you will conclude that therefor all cops should be armed in all circumstances.
    You have this assumption that firearms officers in units such as so13 and so19 are somehow inadequately trained on how to use firearms or are too irresponsible to use them. What lead you to this conclusion? Any suspect who has warranted the dispatch of a firearms response unit would surely also warrant lethal force? It's not like constables on the beat are just being given firearms like some militia, they're being issued to units where they feel officers are more at risk of being attacked or there's a higher chance that an attack will occur. They have to requalify at least once a year on each weapon anyway so it's not like they don't know how use them. You seem very misinformed about the extent of firearm usage in the police.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    If enough complaints are made then they'll have to reverse the decision to allow police to carry arms for everyday policing.
    And then there's an incident involving firearms somewhere in the country. You'll expect a speedy response by suitably equipped officers surely? No, you'll have to wait for them to return to their headquarters from wherever they are patrolling, gear up, then go to the incident.
 
 
 

3,378

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.